Stuff

Ipsos MORI’s monthly political monitor has now been published. Topline figures with changes from their last poll in mid-September, before conference season, are CON 33%(+3), LAB 43%(+2), LDEM 9%(-4), UKIP 6%. The Labour lead remains pretty steady at around ten points, again roughly the same sort of Labour leads MORI have been showing since May.

I am also beginning to have my doubts about RCP’s selection of polls – apart from the Sunshine State Poll mentioned above I was bemused by the inclusion of a Baydoun / Foster poll on Wednesday that had Michigan as a tie (which I found frankly incredible). Does Anthony have any reassuring words for me?!?

I thought that was obvious. I’m working class and oppose foreign aid, as well as unskilled migration. Whereas so many hoo rah Henry’s and Henriettas, spend their gap years in Africa on Daddy’s money helping some village. Also the middle class are less concerned about unskilled migration, as the middle class don’t have to battle unskilled migrants for the jobs. Unskilled migration makes it harder for working class people to get jobs while driving down labour costs for their middle class bosses.

I am definitely one of Ashcrofts Labour voting Liberals (cant remember what the other word was) but if Labour made the argument you have just made regarding immigration then it would persuade me. I have not heard anyone in labour make that case.

Colin I was fully aware of what he was saying, he was discrediting me for saying what I thought to be blatantly obvious.

For some reason, if you give a personal view to a pollster then it’s held in the highest regard, but saying the comment just outright and your accused of being anecdotal.

I assumed it was pretty obvious that us in the working class are opposed to money going to help foreign countries instead of helping those of us who needed it. I thought it was obvious that working class people weren’t too fond of having to work for lower money, and have worse working conditions to remain competitve in the job market.

It would persuade you in which way? You said “I am one of Ashcrofts Labour voting Liberals if Labour made the argument you have just made regarding immigration then it would persuade me. I have not heard anyone in labour make that case.”

It would persuade you to vote for Labour or persuade you to vote Liberal?

Labour will never make that case, as they put electoral success ahead of working class people. Especially modern Labour who actually seek business backing.

@MiM
“But apparently nothing can be obvious without a poll to back it up.”
————————
Maybe you are correct, or maybe not. Might be a good idea to ring 1000+ people at random and see if they agree with you.

Ashcroft’s chopped up voters into types : Liberal Idealist vote Labour and apparently are keen on immigration. So if the Liberal Idealist are strong in the Labour party then Labour will not be tough on immigration.

However, the argument you make would be convincing to Liberal Idealists (I think). I had not looked at immigration that way before. And if the Labour leadership made that argument they would not lose support or votes (I think)

I don’t class support for immigration as “left-wing”, if what we’re talking about – as has been seen in Britain – is the flooding the unskilled labour market with cheap and ready labour, making what is already the most powerless section of society even more powerless. It’s obvious why the middle-class would be less opposed to it, because they’re less affected.

Similarly the middle-class are less affected by benefit cuts, so are found support it in greater numbers. I think what they’ve narrowed it down to are quite unrepresentative of who and what is left-wing. I’d like to see more questions about egalitarian and redistributive efforts (tax levels), opinions on business, and nationalisations (I know the rail nationalisation was asked, but you’d likely get more divergence if the question encompassed more than that catastrophe).

Surely if immigration and foreign aid were really the most important policies to people they would vote ukip or bnp. nobody is unaware of their manifestos so why don’t working class people vote for these parties? the whole point of democracy is to have a choice ,if you don’t like a party, vote for someone else. labour seemed to be doing ok at the moment.

UKIP is seen as a bit of Tory retirement home. And you mention “why don’t more working class voters vote for the BNP” actually a lot of the BNP’s supporters are working class and even former Labour voters.

Think of poor old Mrs Duffy in 2010, she was a lifelong Labour voter, but was worried about immigration, if I remember correctly she said she wasn’t going to vote for any one in 2010.

Also, the reason why most working class aren’t the BNP etc is because the BNP are racist and known to be so. The working class aren’t racist, that’s just a label thrown to try and make them shut up about immigration.

It’s not racist to be worried about increased competition from abroad and a suppression of wages and working standards. If it was easy to get a job and that job paid well, there would be no immigration issue, because the issue on immigration is completely separate from race.

Working class people just want a fair days work for a fair days pay, but no middle class employer is going to offer that, when they can make someone else do more work for less than fair pay.

The middle class have always been more left-wing (and more right-wing) than the working class. They organised the working class to fight and work for them. The working class are too busy working to have too many ideas of political ideology (I’m joking, but you get the idea).

Lenin’s parents were middle class. Stalin just took advantage of his death. Hitler’s parents were lower-middle class, and Hitler was drawn to the middle classes with his art interests. Hess, Goering, Goebbels, Himmler; all wealthy or middle-class (Goebbels’ parents were working class, but he went to university).

Again Paul a big misrepresentation of what I said. I wasn’t saying that because it’s my personal view it’s everyone else’s. I just thought it was obvious (and the poll agrees) that working class people aren’t fond of lower working conditions or less pay. Didn’t think we needed to have a poll on that.

As for foreign aid no one has ever been able to explain to me why a hungry homeless person in Africa is more deserving than a hungry homeless person in Britain. I’m not opposed to foreign aid in principle, but I think we should eradicate poverty in the UK first then we can help others. There are still plenty of people in the UK homeless, or going hungry, in modern Britain that’s shameful. 0.7% of GDP which is 16.8 Billion for 2011 would be able to eradicate homelessness and hunger in the UK. Then we could maybe look to being charitable.

If you’re well off there’s nothing wrong with giving to help others, but the current scenario would be akin to a banker donating to charity while not providing for his own kids.

Paul, plenty of people in the UK die every year of hunger, or while living on the streets. Too many pensioners die in the winter because they can’t afford to heat their homes because the winter fuel allowance isn’t enough to cover soaring energy bills, plenty of people die because while the NHS is great, it’s funding is neglected and it can’t always get the best medicine because it has to keep within budget. There are many deaths in the UK because the ambulance service is stretched too thin and can’t reach people in time who otherwise could be saved if they were treated quickly. 16.8 Billion would go a long long way to solving those problems.

@MM
‘As for foreign aid no one has ever been able to explain to me why a hungry homeless person in Africa is more deserving than a hungry homeless person in Britain. I’m not opposed to foreign aid in principle, but I think we should eradicate poverty in the UK first then we can help others. ‘

The clear difference here – surely – is between relative poverty and absolute poverty. The vast majority of people in the UK likely to be labeled as ‘poor’ are only poor in relation to their more affluent citizens. Such people are likely to have their basic needs satisfied and will very often possess items which but a few years ago would have been widely seen as luxuries – ie telephones , motor vehicles , holidays at home or abroad on a regular basis.There are individual exceptions to that, but it is rare indeed to find UK citizens at serious risk of starvation such as is all too common in the underdeveloped world.. Common humanity – many of us believe – has to come first and on that basis ‘our people’ are no more deserving than anybody else.Too often – whatever our political leanings – we forget how privileged we are to live in the developed world.

Graham think you have been taking a few lines from the Daily Mail handbook

“Such people are likely to have their basic needs satisfied and will very often possess items which but a few years ago would have been widely seen as luxuries – ie telephones , motor vehicles , holidays at home or abroad on a regular basis.”

Wouldn’t happen to be related to Edwina Currie would you? I think you’re naive if you honestly believe what she thinks about there are no kids going hungry in Britain today. The old story of having to choose between heating and eating isn’t just an ancient term, it’s a reality for a lot of people in modern Britain. Why is it your “common humanity” extends to the person miles away but not to the bloke next door? Hunger is hunger at the end of the day. Also you either a permanent roof over your head, or you don’t.

Paul says that we have a lot less, well that’s great, that strengthens my call even more, let’s completely eradicate hunger and homelessness in the UK (shouldn’t take long if there are comparatively few) and then when we can proudly say no British citizen will be left to starve, or left homeless, or without the medical care they need, then we can proudly step forward into the global community and help others.

Also people might be more keen on foreign aid if it actually went to people in need, rather than countries who are richer than us. There are countries out there who really need help, India and China aren’t two of them. They do have poverty, but they’re governments have the money to end that poverty themselves. Also I don’t think giving it to homophobic dictators who are buying weapons to kill their own people is a good idea either.

My plan is 2 fold. Eradicate the 3 I mentioned above in the UK (homelessness, hunger, and poor funding for healthcare) then start giving aid again but targeting it better so it actually does go to those who need it.

And the whole ‘being against immigration because it increases unemployment and therefore lowers wages and working conditions’ arugment is hardly a ‘new’ idea to the left – it’s a standard Marxist argument.
For the right the opposition to immigration isn’t usually (emphasis on usually) an economic one – free movement of labour benefits the capitalist classes – but a cultural one.

Also, the reason we should poll on things that are ‘obvious’ is because we don’t psychologically live in the ‘real world’ but in a biased model of that world – so given that the model lives in a fraction of the brain, it’sd more than likely to be wrong. Garbage in, Garbage out.
Hence why a Labour partisan can see no way the Tories can gain a majority and vice versa.
So we poll to get an accurate picture of the collective (read: average) ‘reality’ and opposed to one person’s ‘reality’.

I actually agree with some of what you say which is quite shocking for me to be writing that as I have tended to support 3rd world charities over and above other charities.

I still believe world poverty is a key thing to sort out but I do get frustrated with the governments of many of those countries getting aid who, even if you don’t subscribe to all the Daily Mail propaganda, clearly prioritise other stuff above ending poverty (space programmes, nukes etc). That doesn’t mean I still wouldn’t want to help their poor as it’s not their fault who is in charge of their country, but it does makes me question more whether my donations will really make a difference.

I kind of disagree a bit with what you say about children going hungry over here. Yes they do but this is a complex issue because a lot of this is due to the parents- either with mental health difficulties, alcohol or drugs. Obviously they are not well off but they can feed their kids if they ‘choose’ to. That doesn’t mean end of story but it does mean that the help that these parents need is very different and revolves more around social services improvements, education, rehab programmes and providing opportunites.

Working class people just want a fair days work for a fair days pay, but no middle class employer is going to offer that, when they can make someone else do more work for less than fair pay.
————————
People have a remedy which doesn’t involve ‘bashing immigration’. Join a Union.
8-)

Tingedfringe, there are certain obvious things that don’t really need polling as they are obvious. Of course you get exceptions, I’m sure you can find a lifelong Millionaire who votes Labour, while writing, Alan Sugar came to mind. But the fact that he supports Labour doesn’t mean you need to commision a poll to find out who most Millionaires support, as you can be fairly certain he is a rare breed and most would actually be more inclined to the Conservatives.

@Shevii, not so much China, but I’m sure India and Brazil are democracies, so actually, the people there do have a say about who gets the money. The truth is as you said, we give the money saying give this to your poor, and governments say thank you for the money but don’t tell me how to spend it, that’s colonial.

As for the kids going hungry, you cited “the help that these parents need is very different and revolves more around social services improvements, education, rehab programmes and providing opportunites.” all of which cost money, all of which could be helped by that extra 16.8 billion. We have kids who are fine during the school time as they get at least 2 healthy balanced meals (Breakfast club at school and free lunch) but then when not in term time they don’t have the same access, I’d like to see government buildings set up across the country, probably incorporated into other buildings for money reasons, where kids can go during their time off from school to get meals. Also build more council housing so that that local councils can provide for it’s homeless rather than having waiting lists.

MM
‘Why is it your “common humanity” extends to the person miles away but not to the bloke next door? Hunger is hunger at the end of the day. Also you either a permanent roof over your head, or you don’t.’

I never read the Daily Mail – my politics are well to the left of New Labour which is why I have not voted Labour at a general election since 1992.
I am well acquainted with our benefits system and have counseled and directed many ‘homeless’ people to claim Crisis Loans and relevant benefits. Nevertheless, I do not think it reasonable to make a meaningful comparison between hardship in our own society and the sheer scale and depth of suffering experienced in the Third World.

Amber, Unions only work when everyone sticks together, if you have a strike and some people go into work still you are undermined.

No employer is going to give you decent conditions and a decent wage, if they can hire someone else who will work more and for less pay. How do Unions solve that problem? They can argue for their members to get more pay and better conditions, but that doesn’t stop the ones working for less pay and more hours from staying at the current rate. The employer will then just hire more people who are willing to work more for less pay, rather than the costly British.

We need to implement the EU working time directive fully, stopping people from working over 48 ( i think its 48) hours and then implement a scaled minimum wage so that the more intensive your work, the higher your minimum wage so you can’t be undercut.

Right to buy is fine as your still providing homes, the fact that person can then move into and buy that home is a good thing. If the council makes a profit from the sell that’s equally good. What mustn’t happy is for all the council homes to be taken up and people still left homeless, so councils need to continue building homes preferably with the money they receive from the sale of the old one.

MIM
To most people it is ‘obvious’ that crime is rising when in reality it is falling.

To a Keynesian it is ‘obvious’ that austerity will fail and to a neoliberal it’s ‘obvious’ that only austerity will work.

It is ‘obvious’ to me, personally, that human politics is constructed according to 4 basic ‘marxist’ units brought together by a social ‘grammar’ but I could be wrong (I most likely am wrong).

See my point?

What is ‘obvious’ to you is based on the model in your head. Your model will accurately reflect reality in some instances but not others.
It may be accurate in guessing which economic class backs which party but the polling result may be counter-intuitive.
Hence why evidence (a poll) will be more accurate than your model.

The sad thing is that if you were passing by, on the proverbial other side of the road, with people you claim should not receive any of “our” money because they are “foreign”, I think you would cross over to help.

When I say that’s sad, I mean because you allow distance to reduce your levels of compassion.

I don’t think you’d pop over and say “Sorry, your government is a bit corrupt so no-can-do matey.”

“To most people it is ‘obvious’ that crime is rising when in reality it is falling.”

No the fact that they are recorded in different ways to make it look as though it’s falling. Similar to how when Unemployment goes down it is because of people giving up, people know REAL unemployment is higher, but the figures are fudged to say otherwise.

Also expressing political viewpoints isn’t obvious. But certain facts such as most millionaires back lower taxes, and that the working class are hit hardest by rising unemployment from increased migration, everyone knows. You don’t need to poll those things. A majority of people on death row in the US don’t support the death penalty, or do we need to have a poll on that before making that comment? Most people have a negative view of recession, do we need to poll that before making that statement? Polling is important, but you don’t need a poll for every comment or statement you make. A degree of common sense is required.

MitM
The argument for overseas aid is partly one of enlightened self-interest; you actually do get your green beans all the year round from Kenya, and tea-cheap shirts and high-quality leisure wear from Cambodia, where incidentally the garment factories are quite heavily unionised and their safety and working conditions regulated by Cambodian ILO trained inspectors. Remittances from garment workers hugely benefit the rural economy, sending home about 40% of their wages to their mums. Poverty in the rural areas can be measured by the fact that 35% of their population are living at under the national poverty line, which is 0.65 US cents. A lot of our aid money goes into infrastructure, with UK and other contractors helping to build roads and irrigation systems under repayable long-term loans channeled through the Bretton Woods development bands, rebuilding infrastructure destroyed under the Khmer Rouge murderous neo-Marxist regime, which killed some 2 milion of the then 7 million population, from real starvation or a club in the back of the head. While it isn’t the first justification, aid there and in Eastern Africa does in fact prevent war, in which we might otherwise find ourselves involved at huge cost both financially and in lives and in the global economy. Yes, there is quite a lot of involvement of our young gilden youth, actually mostly the offspring of first generation middle class people, whose dads were bus conductors, dockers and miners, working in villages under some sometimes dopey NGO operations, but if you checked out VSO and IVS operations from their reports, you’ld find increasingly that volunteers are skilled people in their thirties to fifties, training locals in areas like plumbing and accountancy, or teaching teachers. And yes, though you haven’t said it, the whole damn structure of official aid, EU, UN and World Bank family particularly, has become colonialist and feather-bedded and a comfy life style for careerists, and needs to get a shove up the fanny and moved on; you won’t achieve that, though, by not having the facts.

@Paul There is so much wrong with your analogy I don’t know where to begin. First off it’s my choice to help that person, you’re right I’d probably help that person but at the end of the day it should be my choice. Next I can actually ensure he gets help, I’m not giving it to someone untrustworthy in the hope they give it to him. Finally there is no one I know in the immediate vacinity needing my help. If 2 people needed help, one I knew, one I didn’t I’d be more inclined to go and help the guy I knew.

Here’s an analogy for you Paul, if you see someone on the street begging you for food or money (race is not important), would you say to him “sorry mate I’ve only got one tenner left and I’m sending it to Africa so I can’t help you” or would you give it to him?

Also if we are putting national politics on a personal scale, I’ve never heard of anyone who has trouble paying their bills and is being forced to borrow money just to get by, day to day, (the UK) borrowing extra money to give to charities.

We could actually reduce the deficit through more foreign aid measures: stop creating unfair competition for Third World farmers via subsidies and leave the EU with zero tariffs to all. That would not only cut the deficit and create new jobs in the Third World, but it would also make life a bit less expensive at the shops.

Which is why it will never happen: the gains would be spread widely and the costs would be felt intensely among Tory farmers, protected businessmen and politicians in Brussels.

Why can’t we bring back the “No Stomach Taxes” slogan? It’s one left-wing slogan that I’ve always been fully behind.